arctic ice increases 60%

Corals and other shelled creatures are being damaged by ocean acidification.

Pollution
Its real

 

Volcanic submarine hotspots emit huge amounts of SO2 gas which immediately upon contact with seawater becomes acid. Life flourishes there.

http://www.marinebio.net/marinescience/04benthon/crform.htm

http://www.nefsc.noaa.gov/press_release/2012/SciSpot/SS1210/

 

Err emm..

The problem is real and causing great economic damage to coastal fisheries

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news...cean-threatens-shellfish-farms/article559811/


They say even if CO2 emissions stopped now, it would take tens of thousands of years for Arctic Ocean chemistry to revert to pre-industrial levels.

 

Pollution does damage coastal fisheries. No argument there. You do realize I live near the Gulf of Mexico, right? BP and all that. The dispute I have is with CO2 being a pollutant. Without it marine flora would be hard put to produce food for fish. Natural CO2 poisoning incidents are the result of a volcano burping.

An example: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lake_Nyos

 

So as the ocean becomes more acidic, things will become better?

 

Get better ? With acidification were not talk'n jimmy hendriks, purple haze , feel good stuff

 

The ocean is not becoming more acidic. Constant injection from volcanoes of CO2 and SO2 have not made it more acidic because the ocean is self regulating and sees those chemicals as nutrients of one sort or another. The ocean is in equilibrium. Local pollution is another matter entirely.

 

Smoking pot is one way to get polluted.

Pot smoking tree hugging hippies are harshing my buzz. http://ideas.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/05/28/marijuana-pollution/?_r=0

 

If CO2 scientology is correct, humans have pushed the balance over about 5% per year, the percentage has been higher in the last 20 years, because Al Gore supported giving production to China through the NAFTA program ....

If I concede fuel as contributing 1% more than can be consumed by the environment, and multiply that by 100 years, we have a 1 year excess of CO2.

1 year of excess, but all of the scare mongers know the largest impact is Asia, not the western world.

So, why do they scare the western world instead of fixing the problem?

Either they do not think they can change Asian countries, or they do not consider the problem real.

 

Scientists are responding to conditions that are changing before thier eyes.

Crustacean shell thinning was never observed as a problem in the past. Now it is and the cause has been found to be acidification.

Fossil fuel contribute to acidification

The scientists are not scaring you, they are simply informing you of their findings.

 

Volcanoes cause acidification, read above.

Scienfologists are ignoring 4,000 years of global warming - observed they tell US. And they gave the CO2 production to Asia.

Had they kept the production in US, we would have balanced CO2 emissions, and a balanced US budget ....

The money the 1% made off of pollution tells me they are not innocent.

 

That is probably the most infantile post I ever read.

 

Well, you can attack the truth, or you can attack the author.

You could have seemed more intelligent and unbiased had you attacked the data ......

So, you really believe outsourcing American economic might (jobs - manufacturing) to China did not outsource

TAXES?

And you believe CO2 emissions in China were not increased? You believe they have strict pollution controls compared to the strict controls in the USA?

See how much easier it was for me to attack your claim?

If you want more data: China is one half to one third the US economy (http://www.heritage.org/research/re...china-which-economy-is-bigger-which-is-better), but they produce 40% more carbon (http://www.theguardian.com/news/dat...arbon-dioxide-emissions-country-data-co2#data) ..... effectively, almost 3x the carbon output for the same size economic engine .....

If you had remained silent, I could not have removed all doubt .....

PS, you sparked such a good comment, I had to blog on it.

http://************************/2013/10/20/the-real-co2-emissions-disaster-of-jobs-to-china/

 

Pollution is real. Pollution needs to be reduced.

So, where do you disagree with those statements?

 

You need to stop reading that heritage org stuff or your Brain will shrivel and you will spend the rest of your life blaming others for your predicament.


Then consider that the US is a consumer society. Consumers create pollution as a lifestyle choice, hence it is easier and more effective to change thier behavior when endevouring to reduce pollution